Steve Levicoff has passed away

R.I.P.

https://www.jewishexponent.com/death_notice/steven-levicoff/

 

I don't want to rip the guy, and he was certainly a major contributor to the discussions, but Steve could be unrealistically antagonistic, too.

His "I have an RA doctorate and you don't" attitude was really troubling at times. Lording over people simply because he had a PhD from Union--a school constantly in trouble with various forces--was unseemly. Frankly, he was a nightmare to a lot of people, me included. He exaggerated things, ignored facts counter to his opinions, and attacked people relentlessly--especially those new to the board. If they said something naive, he attacked like a white blood cell after an infection. Some people seemed to enjoy this. I did not.

Steve fought a lot of good fights. But he fought a lot of bad ones, too. With an utter lack of manners and respect. It's simple to treat every issue as binary, but true judgment often lies somewhere in between. Steve never had much patience for subtlety and nuance. Attack dogs never do.

I'm sorry he's gone. But I'm also sorry for all the opportunities that someone as intelligent and talented as Steve should not have missed. Perhaps I failed him by opposing him instead of finding common ground. I don't know. But I wish he'd lived much longer, for he seemed to enjoy it so.

 

What I’ve always appreciated about Dr. Steve Levicoff—may he rest in peace—is the way he stood up for students, especially those misled by predatory or substandard institutions.
Steve called things out directly and without apology.

He didn’t just critique shady practices—he equipped students with the tools to defend themselves. Whether it was a case of diploma mills, unrecognized accreditors, or religious schools operating without oversight, he was often the lone voice saying what needed to be said.

His book Name It and Frame It? was a landmark work. It pulled back the curtain on how some religious and nontraditional schools operated, exposing the misuse of religious exemptions and the loopholes in accreditation that left students vulnerable. It wasn’t just a rant—it was a researched, legally grounded piece that empowered people to ask the right questions before enrolling.

Steve had a sharp tongue and an even sharper mind. But at his core, he was motivated by fairness, accountability, and protecting people from being taken advantage of. That’s what I respected most about him.

 

Well, I've been away for awhile, so this is news to me, and very sad news.

Steve could be abrasive, for sure, but he never took himself as seriously as others did. I found his humor to be amusing most of the time, outlandish at others, but I never lost any sleep over it. His ultimate goal was consumer protection, he just sometimes went about it in very unconventional ways. I remember him standing up for member DI Larry Fleagle, who was tricked into signing a contract to "teach" for a degree mill, and with a few emails from Steve, he was released from his contract.

R.I.P. Steve, you were an original.

 

Yes, it is.

Perhaps because no one managed to be as obnoxious to him as he was to others.

Perhaps you weren't the target of so much of his obsecenities.

His ultimate goal was to treat people horrifically, no matter what they said or did.

Oh, no. Plenty of pompous assholes preceded him. But I'd rather have him here than gone.

 

He and I had a very conflictual relationship for years but then we became friends through the efforts of Uncle Janko. He and a fellow named Brandon on here and I all planned to meet here in Indiana on the I-90 corridor. Unfortunately, we couldn't work it out. I hope he's resting in peace and that his family is doing well during this period of grief and loss.

 

Oh, I got the full Levicoff treatment when I first poked my head into a.e.d. many, many years ago and asked what was, in retrospect, a stupid question. There were no online programs back then, things were much harder to check out, and who knew that there could be a fake LaSalle University in addition to the real one?

Anyway, after the burn cream was applied, I reached out to him via email, and he sent me a kind and very helpful reply (not to say it wasn't still acerbic). I never really crossed swords with him after that, simply because I had no reason to. Arguing on the Internet can sometimes be entertaining, but I generally find it a waste of time, that's why you'll never see me in the Political section here.

I still think Steve was an original, certainly there were others who stirred the pot, but no one else who earned 3 degrees (including a Ph.D.) non-traditionally at a time when DL was in its infancy, literally wrote the book (NIFI) on religious degree mills, and got sued by a degree mill in-the-making, but turned it around to blow it up in their faces.

Whatever his faults, the world and especially the world of DL is less interesting with him no longer in it.

 

Please note that my comments about Levicoff were not directed at any particular person's view of Steve. Levicoff was a complex (and vexing) character. Multiple perspectives can all be right simultaneously.

 

I do remember him seeming to have fun trolling you, usually with back handed insults but sometimes with up front insults, especially on a.e.d.. I never really understood that. He must have enjoyed your reaction for some perverse reason?

 

I was new to the internet and strident in my opinions. I didn't understand then how to deal with a troll, so I became one of Steve's favorite targets. He continued to rag me purposely for years, even after I graduated from Union.

But I can pinpoint exactly when he stopped: when I graduated from Leicester. For some reason that shut him up.

 

Levicoff had a clear eyed view of the actual value of degrees in general and D/L degrees in particular. He had a way of deflating our more naive members' dreams of greatness. Frankly, at times I wondered if his view was a bit more cynical than it might have been. Certainly, it could be painful or irritating.

Since the height of the Levicoff Era, the world of D/L degrees has changed for the better in terms of access and acceptance.

I'm not quite ready to retire my opinions about what I call "degrees with an explanation" nor my overall attitude that most MBA students would do better by seeking a different Masters or even doing without a degree altogether but I'm getting less militant about it.

Just getting old, I guess.

 

I finished my MBA in 1983. Why an MBA? Because, at that time, it was just about the only degree available to working people going to night school.

 

Absolutely, he was definitely an acquired taste and not for everyone.

 

A friend of mine is a higher-level manager for a major utility company, and when he expressed interest in the tuition reimbursement program available for employees, the company flat-out said they'd pay for an MBA program for managers, and that was it. If he wanted any other degree, he was on his own financially.

That was several years ago, I don't know if the same standards are in place now.

 

Yeah, your employer might be willing to front the cost of an MBA but not, say, an M.Acc. or M.S.T. Those degrees might make you too salable for comfort.

(Hey, just channeling the dear departed here.)